strategic assessment of the smart parking market€¦ · in-car, voice-activated parking spot...

26th May 2015

Strategic Assessment of the Smart

Parking Market

Helping Inrix get a clear vision of the key drivers for smart

parking information at a city level and understanding the

consumer value associated with the same

Final Report

2

Source: Frost & Sullivan

Contents

Section Slide No.

Objectives and Methodology 3

Consumer Interest in Parking Information 6

US 7

Europe 24

Parking City Profiles 39

Economic Impact Methodology 40

European Cities 43

US Cities 54

3NF68-18

OEM Interest in Parking Information

4


Automotive

OEMs

OEM Parking

Product/

Technology

Integration

with Parking

Application Business Strategy

Audi Audi Connect INRIX ParkIn-car service partnership* to find, compare, navigate, and pay for nearby

parking spaces.

BMW, MINI MINI Connected JustPark

Acquired strategic stake in JustPark (£250,000 investment from BMW i

Ventures) to improve mobility in urban areas and offers in-car parking

service in MINI cars in the UK to find, book, and navigate to a space.

BMW ParkNow Parkmobile

Investment deal with BMW Group to further expand the footprint of its

“one-stop” ParkNow service to find, book, and navigate to a garage or

on-street parking, with subsequent cashless payments and future

integration into connected vehicles of all OEMs and BMW-connected

vehicles.

Daimler

GottaPark GottaPark

Daimler has a strategic partnership with the company and they co-work

on strategic cooperation projects, including those in Europe. It also offers

discounted parking for smart drivers around San Francisco.

Park2gether Park2gether

Daimler’s Mobility Services’ new online p2p parking platform will have

future integration with mobility services like Car2Go etc. and seamless

integration with available parking management systems.

*Service partnership: A collaboration without investment, typically through licensed services.

Automotive OEMs’ Interests in Parking IndustryEuropean automotive OEMs are more aggressive then North American OEMs in integrating parking as a

service in their offerings.

5


Automotive

OEMs

OEM Parking

Product/Technology

Integration with

Parking Application Business Strategy

Ford SYNC AppLink Parkopedia

In-car, voice-activated parking spot discovery app to

locate available nearby parking spots and get pricing

information.

Jaguar Land

RoverjustDrive Parkopedia

In-car parking service in Europe and China in

partnership with Bosch SoftTec.

PSA Peugeot

Citroën MirrorLink technology Parkopedia

An in-car parking service for Peugeot 108, New

Peugeot 208, New Peugeot Partner, Citroën C1, New

Citroën Berlingo, and New DS 5.

VolvoPark and Pay using

Sensus Connect

EasyPark and

Parkopedia

A service that helps to navigate to a parking space,

pays the parking fee through an onboard system, and

receives information or pays for additional parking

based on car2car and car2infrastructure

communication.

VW

Combined car

navigation system with

SAP

EasyPark

Piloting parking integration for intelligent cars for real-

time information on a free parking space and point of

interests.

Automotive OEMs’ Interests in Parking IndustryAuto OEMs are enriching their portfolios through interests in smartphone-enabled parking and payment

solutions.

6NF68-18

Consumer Interest in Parking Information

8


Key Takeaways

As a packaged feature within

navigation systems, close to

30% interest from US

consumers on a navigation

system with real-time parkingKey

Takeaways There is high interest in the

US with personalized nav

systems that understand user

habits and recommends

routes/other important

services automatically

Luxury Car and SUV

segments expect parking and

other connected services as

standard

As an independent feature

option, 14% US consumers

are interested to pay for a

real-time parking service

Besides Luxury customers,

compact SUV owners and mid

size car owners show good

interest in a parking service

Telematics/Connected

Services and Infotainment

systems are not vehicle

purchase drivers

9


US - Vehicle Purchase DriversSafety and reliability are most important to vehicle owners in the US. Connected services is not a direct

purchase driver

57

62

34

42

52

58

60

76

76

33

33

46

46

60

Infotainment/Multimedia Systems

Customization or personalization

Environmentally friendly

Telematics & Connected Services

Design and style of the interior

Design and style of the exterior

Engine Performance

Price of vehicle

Ride quality

Comfort and convenience

Driving dynamics

Fuel economy/efficiency

Reliability

Safety

Relative Importance of Vehicle Attributes and Features

Style, comfort, and personalization

Performance and reliability

Environment and safety services

Cost and efficiency

MaxDiff

Base: All respondents (n=1,584).

10


34% 39% 36%28% 28%

39%30%

24%

45% 46%

49% 45% 49%55%

46%

47%54%

49%

42% 45%

17% 16% 15% 16%26%

14% 16%27%

13% 9%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

TotalSample

Sub-compact

car----------

Compactcar

----------

Midsize& large

car----------

Specialtycar

----------

Small tomidsize

SUV/CUV----------

LargeSUV

----------

LuxurySUV

----------

Pickuptruck

----------

Minivan----------

Not Important Nice to Have Must Have

For the Current Vehicle Consumers OwnLuxury vehicle segments expect parking as a standard feature for their current vehicle. Other interesting

segments are Midsize cars and Large SUV’s


Q: Please indicate whether real-time parking is a MUST HAVE, NICE TO HAVE, or NOT IMPORTANT feature for the current vehicle you own?

11


34%41% 38%

29% 29% 34% 35% 31% 35%44%

49%45%

46%53% 49%

49% 52%47%

48%

48%

17% 13% 16% 18% 22%16% 14%

22%16%

8%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

TotalSample

Sub-compact

car----------

Compactcar

----------

Midsize& large

car----------

Specialtycar

----------

Small tomidsize

SUV/CUV----------

LargeSUV

----------

LuxurySUV

----------

Pickuptruck

----------

Minivan----------

Not Important Nice to Have Must Have

For their Next VehicleThe picture is pretty consistent even for next vehicle purchase considerations. Subcompact and compact car

owners report lesser interest


Q: Please indicate whether real-time parking is a MUST HAVE, NICE TO HAVE, or NOT IMPORTANT feature for your next vehicle purchase ?

12


A – Highest Take Rate (%)

B – Medium Take Rate (%)

C – Lower Take Rate (%)

Ta

ke

Ra

te

_

+

B

C

2015A

On the whole, Over 14% of the US Customers are interested in paying

and acquiring a parking service for their next vehicle

Analysis of Top Advanced Features by Take Rates (Midpoint Test Price)

Personalized navigation route guidance 27%

Safety Alerts from a Car Ahead 24%

Maintenance and recall alerts 22%

Critical fault notifications 21%

Vehicle Access & Personalization 21%

Driver behavior Analysis for insurance discounts 20%

Internet browsing 20%

In-vehicle service scheduling 18%

Digital Cockpit 18%Natural speech recognition 15%

Over the Air Updates 15%

17 inch plus central displays with capacitive touch 15%

Smart Windows 15%

Dynamic vehicle health reports 14%

Real-time Parking Information 14%

Wireless Device Charging 14%

Personalized driving coaches 13%

Around View Camera 13%

Forward collision warning with emergency braking 13%

Active lumbar support 13%

Emergency Steer Assist 13%

Content Replication- e.g. Apple Carplay, Google Android Auto 12%

Wireless Hotspot 12%

13


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

TotalSample----------

Sub-compact

car----------

Compactcar

----------

Midsize& large

car----------

Specialtycar

----------

Small tomidsize

SUV/CUV----------

Large SUV----------

LuxurySUV

----------

Pickuptruck

----------

Minivan----------

None. I am not willing to pay for the option $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 Take Rate at Mid Point Price

Mid Point

pricing$23 $18 $23 $22 $24 $21 $26 $27 $23 $19

Luxury car segment shows the highest uptake rate at a higher median

price point for real-time parking service in US for their next car


Q: If real-time parking feature were offered as an option, what would be the maximum price that you would be willing to pay? (One-time/year)

14


Interest in Navigation System

Key Features of Mid Range Navigation System

> 7-10” Touchscreen

> Bluetooth

> Map Updates

> Advanced voice recognition

> Rear View Camera Support

> Online Local Search (cheap

fuel stations, etc.)

> Real-Time Information

(traffic, parking)

> Google Send to Car

> Eco-Routes

> Steering Wheel Mounted

Controls

> Display in the Instrument

Cluster

71% Overall Nav

Interest

37% Interest in Mid

Range System

As a package US consumers are interested in a mid level navigation

system that adds parking information

Menu-based conjoint.

Base: All respondents US (n=1,514), 2014 Study.

15

Background Information for US Findings

Vehicle Segments, Demographic Information

16


Methodology : 1584 Vehicle Owner Interviews in US

Methodology: Panel based online survey in US

Field time: January to February 2015

Sample: N=1584 in total

The detailed sample structure is provided on following slide

Overall Quota: On vehicle segment, age group, gender and living areas

Respondent: Car owners

Current car had to be purchased new

Current car model not older than 5 years old (2010 model or

younger) or planning to buy a new car within 3 years

Primary decision maker or joint decision maker with 50% or

more involvement in vehicle purchase

Reporting notes: Due to rounding percentages in charts, tables, etc. may

not sum up to 100

17


Sample StructureAcross countries vs vehicle segments, age groups, gender and living areas

Number of

Respondents

Total

Sample

Next Vehicle Segment

Sub-

compact Car

Compact

Car

Midsize &

Large Car

Luxury

Car

Small to

Midsize

SUV/CUV Large SUV Luxury SUV

Pickup

Truck Minivan

Northeast 395 27 70 70 36 65 27 42 25 33

South 400 35 70 71 33 61 27 36 37 30

Midwest 395 18 70 67 33 62 32 38 34 41

West 394 17 70 80 39 71 24 45 34 14

Total 1,584 97 280 288 141 259 110 161 130 118

49%51%

Gender: United States, 2015

Female

Male

14%

20%

18%16%

17%

15%

Age: United States, 2015

18 to 25

26 to 35

36 to 45

46 to 55

56 to 65

66 or older

18


Current Vehicle Segment Owned and Future Segment

Interest

Current

Vehicle

Segment

Total

Sample

Next Vehicle Purchase Segment

Sub-

com-

pact

car

Com-

pact

car

Midsize

& large

car

Spec.

car

Small

to

midsize

SUV/

CUV

Large

SUV

Luxury

SUV

Pickup

truckMinivan

Sub-compact

car6% 40% 6% 3% 4% 2% 4% 3% 2% 4%

Compact car 22% 21% 49% 17% 17% 18% 16% 11% 17% 13%

Medium and

large car20% 12% 18% 47% 25% 14% 7% 11% 10% 8%

Specialty car 9% 9% 6% 9% 30% 3% 5% 12% 8% 5%

Small to

midsize

SUV/CUV

19% 8% 13% 10% 6% 51% 18% 20% 11% 14%

Large SUV 5% - 2% 3% 1% 2% 36% 3% 4% 4%

Luxury SUV 8% 4% 3% 8% 13% 2% 4% 35% 5% -

Pickup truck 5% 2% 2% 2% 4% 2% 5% 1% 41% 1%

Minivan 6% 3% 1% 1% 1% 5% 5% 2% 2% 51%

Vehicle segment

SUV/CUV owners show the highest loyalty to the segment in terms of future interest


19


Next Vehicle Purchase Segment and Budget

Q4. What type of vehicle are you most likely to purchase next?

Compact car, medium/large car, and small to midsize SUV/CUV comprise over half (52%) of next

vehicle purchases by vehicle owners. Combined together, large SUV and luxury SUV account for 17%

of planned next vehicle purchases. Luxury SUV and specialty cars have the highest budget for their

next vehicle at $55.5K.

18%

18%

16%

10%

9%

8%

7%

7%

6%

Compact car

Medium and large car

Small to midsizeSUV/ CUV

Luxury SUV

Specialty car

Pickup truck

Large SUV

Minivan

Sub-compact car

Type of Vehicle for Next Purchase


$36,260

$44,132

$40,510

$55,574

$55,497

$40,743

$45,047

$35,949

$33,053

Budget for Next Purchase

QC3. About how much is your budget for your next vehicle purchase

(total out the door)?


20


Residential InformationSuburbs dominate the area of residence

S9. What type of area do you live in?

36%49%

36%43% 42%

26% 29%

48%

29% 27%

49%39%

51%50% 49%

57% 55%

44%

31%50%

14% 12% 14% 7% 9%18% 16%

8%

40%23%

Total Sample Sub-compactcar

Compact car Midsize &large car

Specialty car Small tomidsize

SUV/CUV

Large SUV Luxury SUV Pickup truck Minivan

Residence

Urban Area (city, town, etc.) Suburbs (area surrounding a city or town) Rural (live in the country)


21


Gender

S10. And are you...

51% 55%47%

52%63%

44%51%

58%

70%

33%

49% 45%53%

48%37%

56%49%

42%

30%

67%

TotalSample

Sub-compact

car

Compactcar

Midsize &large car

Specialtycar

Small tomidsize

SUV/CUV

LargeSUV

LuxurySUV

Pickuptruck

Minivan

Gender

Female

Male


22


Consumers Age Mix

S11. Please select your age range...

4542

4544

42

4644

42

49 49




SUV/CUV


Age


23


Average Number of Miles Driven per Year

10,6899,998

10,345 10,41010,799 10,775 10,816

11,463 11,65511,113




SUV/CUV


Average Number of Miles Driven per Year


C5. On average, how many miles do you drive in a year?

24

Europe

25


Key Takeaways

Even A&B segment owners

show moderate interest in

acquiring a navigation system

with real-time services like

parking and trafficKey

Takeaways

European consumers still

value safety and reliability of

the vehicle as key purchase

drivers compared to other

technology features

Compact cars, luxury cars and

large SUV segments expect

parking and other connected

services as standard

26% of European consumers

are willing to pay for a mid

range navigation system with

access to real-time services

like parking and traffic

European OEMs are using their

mobility brand to integrate real-

time parking service and invest

in innovative parking

companies, e.g. BMW

Telematics/Connected Services

and Infotainment systems are not

vehicle purchase drivers across

Europe

26


Europe - Vehicle Purchase DriversThe general perception of safety ranks very highly in the next vehicle purchase attributes list

55

51

41

39

35

34

20

20

18

17

16

12

8

Reliability

Safety

Fuel economy/efficiency

Driving dynamics

Price of vehicle

Comfort and convenience

Powertrain

Telematics and Connected Services

Environmentally friendly

Design and style of the exteriors

Design and style of the interior

Multimedia/Infotainment Systems

Customization or personalization

Relative Importance of Vehicle Features

Q12. Maxdiff - Mean scores


27


Interest in Navigation System

Key Features of Mid Range Navigation System

10” touch screen

Advanced Voice Recognition

Real time parking/traffic

information

Steering Wheel Mounted

Controls

Display in instrument cluster

Bluetooth

Map Updates

3D Mapping

Online Local Search

Google send to car

Real Time Eco Scores

Eco Routes

63% Overall Nav

Interest

26% Interest in Mid

Range System

As a package European customers are interested in a mid range

navigation system with real-time information on parking and traffic

Menu-based conjoint.

Base: All respondents US (n=1,514), 2014 Study.

Entry

package

None of

the three

packages

Medium

package

Premium

package

21%

37%

26%

16%

28

Background Information for European Findings

Vehicle Segments, Demographic Information

29


Methodology : 2869 interviews in G4 countries and

Russia

Methodology: Panel based online survey in Europe G4 (France, Germany,

Italy, UK) and Russia

Field time: February to March 2014

Sample: N=2,869 in total

The detailed sample structure is provided on following slide

Overall Quota: On vehicle segment, age group, gender and living areas

Respondent: Car owners

Current car had to be purchased new

Current car model not older than 5 years old (2009 model or

younger) or planning to buy a new car within 3 years

Primary decision maker or joint decision maker with 50% or

more involvement in vehicle purchase

Reporting notes: Due to rounding percentages in charts, tables, etc. may

not sum up to 100

30


Sample StructureAcross countries vs vehicle segments, age groups, gender and living areas

Total France Germany Italy UK Russia

Total 2,869 596 599 619 590 465

By segment

A&B 562 20% 124 21% 105 18% 118 19% 113 19% 102 22%

C 570 20% 121 20% 115 19% 119 19% 110 19% 105 23%

D 562 20% 132 22% 112 19% 127 21% 120 20% 71 15%

E&F 360 13% 58 10% 110 18% 73 12% 82 14% 37 8%

MPV 289 10% 97 16% 57 10% 70 11% 57 10% 8 2%

SUV – S (small/medium) 307 11% 51 9% 54 9% 59 10% 55 9% 88 19%

SUV – L (large) 219 8% 13 2% 46 8% 53 9% 53 9% 54 12%

By age

18 to 24 195 7% 25 4% 53 9% 39 6% 35 6% 43 9%

25 to 34 711 25% 114 19% 138 23% 131 21% 160 27% 168 36%

35 to 44 840 29% 170 29% 153 26% 238 38% 139 24% 140 30%

45 to 54 657 23% 144 24% 165 28% 139 22% 122 21% 87 19%

55 or older 466 16% 143 24% 90 15% 72 12% 134 23% 27 6%

By gender

Male 1,751 61% 365 61% 375 63% 358 58% 362 61% 291 63%

Female 1,118 39% 231 39% 224 37% 261 42% 228 39% 174 37%

By area

Urban area 1,896 66% 354 59% 357 60% 462 75% 283 48% 440 95%

Suburbs 609 21% 116 19% 145 24% 112 18% 223 38% 13 3%

Rural 364 13% 126 21% 97 16% 45 7% 84 14% 12 3%

31


Prevalence of Vehicle Segment Switching: Likely Next

Vehicle Segment

Q1. Which segment of vehicle are you most likely to acquire next? Q2. How much do you expect to spend on your

next vehicle (in Euros)?

More vehicle owners currently in the sub-compact car segment are likely to switch to a compact car

with their next vehicle purchase. The compact, and medium to large car segments are expected to be

competitive with the MPV segment.


Current Vehicle

Segment Owners:

Sub-

compact

Car

Compact

Car

Medium

and Large

Car

Executive

and

Luxury MPV Small SUV

Large

SUV

Segment likely to

purchase next…

Sub-compact car 24% 8% 2% 2% 7% 4% 2%

Compact car 53% 40% 16% 11% 22% 13% 10%

Medium and large car 9% 26% 45% 18% 24% 19% 12%

Executive and luxury 2% 7% 21% 48% 8% 16% 25%

MPV 2% 4% 3% 3% 24% 1% 1%

Small SUV 9% 13% 7% 6% 7% 25% 11%

Large SUV 1% 2% 6% 13% 7% 22% 38%

Expected spend on next

vehicle (mean, Euros)€ 19,234 € 24,864 € 32,255 € 42,840 € 26,617 € 34,918 € 46,849

32

Mean Minutes Spent in Vehicle During Weekdays

127 122

98

130

101

201

Total Sample France Germany Italy UK Russia

Mean Minutes Spent in Vehicle During Weekdays by Country (Interpolated Means)

Q35_1. On average, how much time do you typically spend in your vehicle? - Average time spent per day on weekdays (Monday to Friday)


33

Mean Annual Mileage (Kilometers)

27,32924,964

27,373

31,054

24,571

28,955


Mean Annual Mileage by Country (Kilometers, Interpolated Means)

Q34. On average, how many miles/kilometers do you drive in a year?


34

Mean Kilometers Driven to Work

28 28 29 2831

23


Mean Miles Driven to Work by Country (Kilometers, Interpolated Means)

Q36. Approximately what distance do you drive (one way) to your place of work?


35

Location of Residence

66%59% 60%

75%

48%

95%

21%19% 24%

18%

38%

13%21% 16%

7%14%

TotalSample

France Germany Italy UK Russia

Location of Residence by Country

Rural (live in the country)

Suburbs (areas surrounding a city ortown)

Urban Area (city, towns etc.)

S2. What type of area do you live in?


36

Age

42

44

4241

43

37


Age by Country (Interpolated Means)

S3. Please select your age


37

Gender

61% 61% 63% 58% 61% 63%

39% 39% 37% 42% 39% 37%


Gender by Country

Female

Male

S4. What is your gender?


38

2013 Mean Household Gross Income

€ 65,996€ 59,903

€ 77,752

€ 59,000

€ 67,566

Total Sample France Germany Italy UK

2013 Mean Household Gross Income by Country (Euros, Interpolated Means)

Q46. What was your gross household income in 2013 (in Euros)? - France, Germany, Italy, and United Kingdom, Russia (Rubles)


$797,888

Russia

Russia (Rubles)

39NF68-18

Parking City Profiles

40

Methodology for Calculating Economic Impact of

Parking

Data points:

1. Congestion time wastage hours/ year is obtained mostly from TTI’s 2012 Urban Mobility Report and sourced from

INRIX traffic survey

2. Planning Time Index of 3.09 is kept constant for US and Europe and applied to all cities

3. Fuel consumed in liters in congestion per vehicle is obtained from CEBR report and assumed country average for cities

wherever data was not available

4. Average fuel cost is obtained from CEBR report and from secondary sources wherever data was not available

5. Average Fuel economy of a vehicle is considered for US and EU cities respectively. US(15.3 km/liter); EU(18.9

km/liter)

6. Considered average speed maintained to search for parking as 20km/hour

Sample Economic Impact Calculation for London:

• Fuel cost = $2.10/ltr

• Fuel economy of a vehicle = 18.9 km/liter

• Cruising cost = fuel cost/fuel economy= ($2.10/ltr) / (18.9km/ltr) = $0.11/km

• Assumed parking speed = 20km/hr

• Fuel cost per hour of searching for parking= parking speed*cruising cost = $2.2/hr

• Annual Hours wasted in congestion = 252.1 hours

• Economic $ value impact parking/vehicle/year = Fuel cost per hour searching for parking * Annual Hours wasted in

congestion = $561

41

CitiesAnnual Hours Wasted for

ParkingEconomic Impact

London 76 hours/year $561 /vehicle/year

$1.43 Billion/Year

Berlin 43 hours/year $ 531 /vehicle/Year

$604 Million/Year

Amsterdam 62 hours/year$ 319/vehicle/Year

$84 Million/Year

Paris 51 hours/year$ 368/vehicle/Year

$1.83 Billion/Year

San Francisco 52 hours/year$213/Vehicle/Year

$82 Million/Year

New York 49 hours/year $201/Vehicle/Year

$362 Million/Year

Chicago 48 hours/year $197/Vehicle/Year

$266 Million/Year

Washington D.C. 63 hours/year $258/Vehicle/Year

$74 Million/Year

Annual Hours Wasted For Parking and Economic Impact

42

Top Level Comparison – Based on City Profiles

0.000.200.400.600.801.001.201.401.601.802.00

Econom

ic I

mpact

of T

ime W

aste

d F

indin

g P

ark

ing (

$B

illio

n)

43

European Cities

44

City ID - LondonLondon is divided into 33 boroughs, with the local authorities handling parking issues. 2013-14 shows a

fall in tickets for low-level offences, even thought the total ticket numbers have increased.

• The UK’s richest parking authority, Westminster,

issued 449,139 tickets, compared to 456,000 last

year.

• Top five councils for parking fines are all in London,

with Westminster making £51m in the year 2013/14.

• Kensington & Chelsea were the second with £33m,

Camden earned £24.8m, Hammersmith & Fulham

£22.9m and Wandsworth £19m. Tower Hamlets and

Islington also make the Top 10.

• Contributes 44% to the £667m of the overall total

raked in by local councils across the UK. The total

figure has surged 12% from last year's already

sizeable amount of £596m.

• Parking penalty charges (high + low level offences)

issued to London drivers hit £4.08m

• 40% of total income comes from London, although

Londoners own only 10% of the cars in the UK but,

of course, incoming commuters will also contribute

to parking income and penaltiesNote:

• High level offences: parking on double yellow lines, stopping at a

bus stop or pedestrian crossings or double parking)

• Lower level contraventions: overstaying time on a parking meter

or not parking within markings of a bay Source:

http://www.lbc.co.uk/london-councils-make-293m-from-parking-fines-101859

http://tribune.com.pk/story/854058/dubai-tops-new-york-london-for-cars-per-person/

Key InsightsMetrics Data

Population 8,416,535 (2013)

Number of Cars 2,549,300 (2013)

Number of parking spaces 10 million (2013)

Parking income (on- and off-

street) – Councils in London£565.1 million (2013)

Parking fines On-street

Councils in London

£242million – 71% of the national

total of £343m

Parking tickets issued for

high level offences3,087,186 (2013)

Parking tickets issued for

lower level offences992,516 (2013)

Congestion charging£11.50 ($17.80) a day for vehicles

entering the inner-city area.

Degree of motorization 307 cars per 1000 residents ( 2013)

Congestion time wastage

(incl. planning time index)252 hours/year (2013)

Time wasted for parking 76 hours/year (2013)

% of urban traffic for finding

parking 30% (2013)

Economic Impact$561 /vehicle/year

$1.43 Billion/Year

http://www.lbc.co.uk/london-councils-make-293m-from-parking-fines-101859

http://tribune.com.pk/story/854058/dubai-tops-new-york-london-for-cars-per-person/

45

Parking Enforcement 2013-14

Enforcement Activity 2013-14

Enforcing Authority

Hig

her

Level

Park

ing P

CN

s

Low

er

Level

Park

ing P

CN

s

Tota

l P

ark

ing

PC

Ns

Bus lane P

CN

s

Movin

g T

raffic

PC

Ns

London L

orr

y

Contr

ol S

chem

e

(Opera

tors

)

London L

orr

y

Contr

ol S

chem

e

(Drivers

)

Tota

l P

CN

s

London L

orr

y

Contr

ol S

chem

e

(Observ

ations)

Tota

l V

ehic

les

cla

mped

Vehic

les

rem

oved t

o

pound

London Councils 4,337 1,000 5,337 13,286

Barking & Dagenham 50,403 5,202 55,605 19,708 18,641 93,954

Barnet 107,278 43,178 150,456 16,577 167,033

Bexley 39,766 9,035 48,801 48,801

Brent 75,457 37,352 112,809 5,681 24,029 142,519 3,085

Bromley 58,280 30,180 88,460 4,439 92,899

Camden 146,783 88,581 235,364 13,562 28,980 277,906 10 3,058

City of London 51,482 6,281 57,763 4,508 62,271 293

Croydon 68,237 26,628 94,865 282 12,010 107,157 2,637

Ealing 77,804 29,839 107,643 24,171 19,509 151,323 483

Enfield 58,450 20,663 79,113 1,899 13,069 94,081 1,412

Greenwich 19,409 11,187 30,596 30,596

Hackney 65,928 16,793 82,721 635 7,586 90,942 2,973

Hammersmith & Fulham 114,894 44,179 159,073 11,503 99,197 269,773 1,373

Haringey 148,400 23,415 171,815 3,125 13,776 188,716 2,961

Harrow 55,855 13,227 69,082 7,426 38,305 114,813

Havering 27,817 8,194 36,011 36,011

Hillingdon 37,175 26,532 63,707 1,605 8,409 73,721

Hounslow 76,597 29,189 105,786 18,706 5,477 129,969 536

Islington 115,606 51,049 166,655 9,699 33,610 209,964 34 128

Kensington & Chelsea 115,050 75,792 190,842 190,842 1,611 6,465

Kingston 39,683 19,398 59,081 25,051 16,271 100,403

Lambeth 112,717 20,530 133,247 30,030 23,172 186,449 2,890

Lewisham 28,448 19,159 47,607 8,623 7,234 63,464

Merton 39,158 20,392 59,550 14,579 12,269 86,398

Newham 135,189 24,178 159,367 2,833 20,415 182,615 5,581

Redbridge 76,458 36,264 112,722 7,018 119,740

Richmond 39,951 29,554 69,505 3,035 597 73,137

Southwark 74,250 15,690 89,940 564 11,265 101,769 8

Sutton 27,500 8,446 35,946 35,946

Tower Hamlets 113,424 19,161 132,585 1,346 1,947 135,878 2,484

Waltham Forest 81,214 11,340 92,554 9,261 28,993 130,808 1 2,526

Wandsworth 124,056 40,054 164,110 88 9,434 173,632 1,333

Westminster 302,032 131,854 433,886 15,253 449,139

Transport for London 382,435 382,435 20,249 169,233 571,917

TOTAL 3,087,186 992,516 4,079,702 254,677 650,207 4,337 1,000 4,989,923 1,656 40,226

Source: http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/services/parking-services/parking-and-traffic/parking-information-professionals/information

http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/services/parking-services/parking-and-traffic/parking-information-professionals/information

46

• Westminster has 11,000 paid spaces in the city.

Around 15% of spaces are unoccupied because

drivers are unaware of their location.

• The "smart parking" pilot with company “Smart

Parking” involves sensors which detect when a

parking space on the street lies empty. This data is

then released to the public through a mobile device

app, which allows drivers to find these spaces.

1st Phase: Sep’12 to Nov’12

Successful trial operation, installing 189 SmartEye

sensors in several Westminster streets

2nd Phase: Nov’12 to Jul’14

Next phase of deployment led 3,500 sensors

operational

3rd Phase: Jun’14 to May’15

Additional 7,000 sensors installation by May 2015

Project Background

• The scheme costs <=$1 million, for 10,000 spaces

• SmartEye sensors detect whether a parking space

is available or in use and send the information to a

central database.

• The ParkRight API provides real time availability

on over 3,000 parking spaces around the West

End and static data on over 40,000 parking spaces

across the City of Westminster.

Fiscal Impact

Smart Parking Initiatives in LondonThe trial generated £4,000 over four locations (=£16,000 annually) from the 104 paid space in four streets. With 11,000

paid spaces in the city, and the evaluation demonstrated a real ROI of £2.8 million over five years.

Project phases

Westminster faced ongoing challenges including:

• Significant demand for parking spaces

• Theft from the council’s on street parking metres of

£50,000/ week

• Loss of other income to organized crime estimated

at £70,000 /week

• Significant maintenance costs for 4,400 ageing

and outdated parking meters

• Significant operational costs including the

collection and management of cash money

Parking Challenges

Source: http://www.local.gov.uk/documents/10180/6360115/Westminster+Parking+case+study+-+FINAL.pdf/2a56ddb9-bf77-416c-abff-83893a680521

http://www.local.gov.uk/documents/10180/6360115/Westminster+Parking+case+study+-+FINAL.pdf/2a56ddb9-bf77-416c-abff-83893a680521

47

• The Birmingham/Amey trial is piloting systems from a Streetline/IBM partnership and the UK companies Deteq and

Smart Parking.

• Smart Parking trialed SmartPark for the London Borough of Camden. It involves installation of 282 SmartEye

sensors alongside SmartLink zone controllers (March 2014)

• Smart Parking's bay sensor technology and its associated real-time reporting platform, SmartRep will assist Barnet

Council in achieving an increase in occupancy and turnover in their town centres (2015)

• Transport for London (TfL), has chosen Smart Parking for 31 of its off-street car parks in London Underground

network – Uses 1,500 of Smart Parking’s RFID-equipped SmartEye vehicle detection sensors, linked via SmartLink

(2015). The five-year agreement, which will include the provision of equipment, maintenance and hosting, will

enable car park users to park, pay, and walk away, with no need to return to their vehicle to display a ticket.

• Parking Apps aid drivers in London search, reserve and pay for parking online. Few of the app providers are –

Other projects

Smart Parking Initiatives in UK

Sources:

http://www.parking-net.com/parking-news/smart-parking-ltd/tfl-london-underground;

https://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/rup-20150520-part-1-item08-car-park-strategy.pdf

JustPark

ParkJockey

Parkmobile

Paybyphone

Parkright

RinGo

AppyParking

Park-up

http://www.local.gov.uk/documents/10180/6360115/Westminster+Parking+case+study+-+FINAL.pdf/2a56ddb9-bf77-416c-abff-83893a680521

http://www.parking-net.com/parking-news/smart-parking-ltd/tfl-london-underground

https://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/rup-20150520-part-1-item08-car-park-strategy.pdf

48

City ID- Berlin

City ID

Source: http://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/verkehr/politik_planung/strassen_kfz/index_en.shtml

Key InsightsMetrics Data

Population 3,421,829(2013)

Number of Cars 1.14 million (2013)

Number of parking

spaces 94,350 (2013)

Revenue (traffic, driving

and parking fines)€ 70,607,050 (2013)

Parking revenue from

fines

€ 14,121,410(Assuming 20% of

the total fines revenue)

Congestion Charging None

Degree of motorization324 cars per 1,000 residents

(2013)


(incl. of planning time)108 hours/year (INRIX)


% of peak hour traffic for

finding parking 40% (2013)

Economic Impact$ 531 /vehicle/Year

$604 Million/Year

• Number of registered motor vehicles on 01/01/2014:

1,154,106

• 42 parking areas and 2500 ha parking zones

(existing) and planned extension

• On-street parking rates – City Centre (Mon-Sat): €

0,75 /15 min (€ 3,00/hour)

• On-street parking rates – Around City Centre (Mon-

Sat) : € 0.25-0,50 per 15 min.

• Potsdam, the state capital of Brandenburg near

Berlin, collected around 1.2 million euros in parking

fines last year and issued around 120,000 parking

tickets

• A driver wastes €1.35 in fuel and generates an extra

1.3 kilograms of CO2 emissions.

• Effective parking management is an inevitable

measure within the urban transport toolbox and it has

led to a 10% reduction in parking demand in the

managed area in Berlin

• Berlin only permits low-emission vehicles to enter its

city center

http://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/verkehr/politik_planung/strassen_kfz/index_en.shtml

49

City2.e

Key Objectives:

Practical demonstration of an intelligent parking space monitoring and control, including the parking of charging

stations for electric cars.

Development of a test pattern of a holistic parking detection, subsequent field testing and the development of a

system architecture for monitoring and controlling the detected locations.

Solution to demonstrate the traffic information center Berlin along with the German Research Center for Artificial

Intelligence (DFKI) for adaptive forecasting models, which will enable the prediction of the offer of parking and

loading spaces

Radar based Smart Parking System (by Siemens AG):

Key Objectives:

Develop a radar system informing drivers via smartphone where to look for a free spot.

Started test in April 2015 of about 40 radar sensors mounted on street lamps.

Each detector, about half a shoebox in size, scans 30 meters (100 yards) of road and uses an app to transmit

information about potential spaces matching the car’s size.

The network also alert parking patrols when meters run out or a driver has failed to pay a fee

Parking Apps: ParkTag, Parkopedia, Mobil-parken.de

Key projects

Smart Parking Initiatives in Berlin

50

City ID—Amsterdam

City IDKey InsightsMetrics Data

Population 805,166 (2013)

Number of Cars 263,000 (2013)

Number of parking spaces 250,000 (156,843 paid parking

places)

Parking Permits Issued 190,000

Parking Revenue€250 million (parking ticket rate

increased by 6% in 2014)

Parking revenue from fines €166 million (2013)

Time wasted for parking 62 hours/year


parking 40% (2013)

Time wasted during

congestion (incl. of planning

time)

154 hours/ year (INRIX)

Degree of motorization 247 cars per 1000 residents (2014)

Parking rates

Inner center: €5 per hour

Parking day rates from 0900, :

Mon-Sat cost €30 (until 1900), €36

(until 2100) and €45 (until midnight).

Sunday rates are €21, €27 and €36

respectively

Number of Bikes 880,000

Economic Impact$ 319/vehicle/Year

$84 Million/Year

• 63% of commuters in Amsterdam use their bike on a

daily basis. 32% of traffic movement in the city is by

bike compared to 22% by car and 16% by public

transport.

• In the city centre, 48% of traffic movement is by bike.

City has run out of bike parking space, hence

increasing the number by 40,000 by 2030

• Official bike ‘parking’ places near Amsterdam

Central Station – Parking facilities in public space:

250.000 racks

Supervised storage (paid): 13.000 racks

Municipal supervised storage (free): 4.000 racks

• In the year 2013, due to illegally parked bicycles,

authorities removed 73,000 bikes from the streets.

• Parking Centrum Oosterdok charges fixed €10 for 5-24

hours; P1 Amsterdam centre has pre-booked online

rate of €20 for 24 hours.

• Revenue from parking fines in Amsterdam totaled

€166 million in 2013 or €9 million more than in 2012.

51

MobyPark: A Parking App in in collaboration with Amsterdam Smart City

• Mobypark offers all the available places on a platform where it's possible to see real time availability and book these

parking spots ahead.

• Mobypark aims to, among others in collaboration with Amsterdam Smart City, enlarge the amount of parking places

and partner up with different with public and private organizations. The service of Mobypark consists of a website

and an app (Android and iOS).

• City’s parking application is algorithm- and predictive modeling-based. The system keeps track of payments and

parking sessions. Based on this information, it indicates the availability of parking in areas throughout the city

Schiphol Smart Parking:

• Most economical parking option at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol - Schiphol Smart Parking.

• Customers can park their cars for 8 days at cost of only EUR 49.50; reservation for three days or mor

• Advance online reservation with camera based parking monitoring

• Connected shuttle to the terminal in less than five minutes(run every 10 minutes, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week)

Other Parking Apps:

• Parkmobile; ParkShark; SMSParking

Key projects

Smart Parking Initiatives in Amsterdam

52

City ID— Paris

• Paris removed 4000 parking spaces from its city

centre to accommodate new Velib cycle sharing

system stations, cycle parking, disabled parking and

public transport access even on narrow streets

• On-street parking supply was reduced by 9%

(14,300 spots), while 95% of free spots were turned

into paid parking.

• Space was also reallocated to motorcycle, bicycle,

disabled parking, and tramway corridor access.

• The city enabled cashless parking for 155,000

parking spaces.

City ID

Metrics Data

Population 2.34 million (2013)

Number of Cars4,985,715 (2007); 35 million

cars in France (2013)

Number of parking

spaces

755,000 (on-street: 165,000;

off-street: 590,000)

Number of bicycle

parking spaces30,000

Revenue earned from

parking fines 60 million euros (2011)

Time wasted for parking 51 hours/year(2013)

% of urban traffic for



(incl. of planning time)

170 hours/year (2013 from

INRIX)

Degree of motorization287 cars per 1000 people

(2013)

Parking rates

Curbside Fees: €1, €2 or €3

per hour depending on zone,

€0.5 per day for residents

Economic Impact$ 368/vehicle/Year

$1.83 Billion/Year

Key Insights

53

• Smart Park offers a Meet and Greet service at the Airport, in the drop-off zone at departure terminal. Customers

are taken to an indoor or outdoor parking lot, fully enclosed, secure, monitored 24/7. The vehicle will then be

delivered directly to the customer’s arrival terminal

• Rates are varied and range between 80 and 110 € round trip to Orly Airport, and between 100 and 140 € for the

airport of Roissy Charles de Gaulle for customers who live in or near Paris suburb

• The consortium of companies VINCI Park and PayByPhone won the tender of the City of Paris for the establishment

of payment by mobile street parking. This service will give motorists the ability to manage their mobile or internet

parking, avoiding handling coins or cards on public roads

• Parking City Pass" parking passes – Customers can select their preferred car park from the list or from on the

map of Paris, for their vehicle category. Once done, on completion of the reservation form and payment via our

secure payment service, customers can directly access the parking area

Other projects

Smart Parking Initiative in Paris

54

US Cities

55

City ID—San Francisco

• SF’s revenue from parking in 2014 was $59 million,

that’s an average revenue of $1,839 per meter

• Top 3 parking violations in SF are

• Street Cleaning

• Parking Meter Violation

• Residential Permit Parking

• SF releases 7 metric tons of greenhouse gasses per

day.

• Approximately 1.5 million parking and transit

citations issued annually generated approximately

$95 million in revenue

City ID

Metrics Data

Population 837,442 (2013)

Number of Cars 385,442 (Dec 2012)

Number of parking spaces 442,000 (2014)

Revenue earned from parking

fines

$83,290,024 (2012)

$88,889,809 (2013)

$88,034,218 (2014)

Revenue from parking

$38,927,280 (2012)

$49,320,147(2013)

$59,155,385 (2014)

Total Parking tickets issued 1,549,518 (2013)

Degree of motorization562 cars per 1000

residents


(incl. of planning time)173 hours/year (2013)



parking 30% (2013)

Economic Impact

(congestion)$3.3 billion (2011)

Economic Impact (parking)$213/Vehicle/Year

$82 Million/Year

Key Insights

56

SF Park

SF Park is a pilot project by the SF Municipal Transport Authority started in April 2011

SF Park covers 8,228 of San Francisco’s 28,800 metered spaces and 12,250 spaces in 15 of the 20 parking

garages that the SFMTA manages.

Funding for SFpark project comes primarily from a $19.8 million grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation’s

Urban Partnership Program.

Uses in-ground parking sensors that detect when vehicles enter and exit a parking space and credit card enabled

parking meters.

Demand responsive parking fares. Increases, Decreases parking fee based on parking demand in that locality.

Time to find parking decreases 43% with SF Park, down by 5 mins

Monthly meter related citation revenue dropped from $82 to $61 per meter—a 26% decrease.

Other market participants are – Streetline, ParkMe

Other projects

Smart Parking Initiatives in San Francisco

57

City ID—New York CityDivided into 5 boroughs, with the local authorities handling parking issues.

• New York City (NYC) earns ~$600 million yearly

revenue from parking tickets.

• The city has the largest parking market in the United

States, with nearly $2 billion spent per year.

• NYC DOT (Department of Transportation) used on-

street parking to create a low-cost, protected bicycle

lane at Lower Manhattan’s Grand Street.

• Launched PARKSmart to make parking easier, while

reducing congestion and improving safety.

• Dynamic pricing - The meter rate is higher when

demand for parking is greatest and decreases when

demand is lower.

• The city has 86,000 networked parking spaces

supported by a 100% pay-and-display meter.

• New York Has 81,875 Metered Parking Spaces

City ID

Metrics Data

Population 19,651,127 (2013)

Number of Cars 1.8 Million (2013)

Number of parking

spaces ~3.4 million

Number of Off-Street

Public Parking Spaces102,000 spaces (Manhattan CBD)

Revenue earned from

parking fines

2014 – $587,623,500

2013 – $508,165,050

Uncollected parking violation fines

– 2014 - $228M, 2013 – $217M,

2012 - $234M

Parking meter revenues2014 – $825,930

2013 - $670,966

Degree of motorization 305 cars per 1000 residents

Congestion time

wastage (incl. of

planning time)

164 hours/year (2013 INRIX)




Economic Impact$201/Vehicle/Year

$362 Million/Year

Key Insights

58

PARK Smart

PARK Smart is a program to make parking easier while reducing congestion and improving safety. DOT is

conducting six-month pilots in neighborhoods across the City to evaluate how the program works in different

settings.

PARK Smart Areas

Greenwich Village, Manhattan

Park Slope, Brooklyn

Jackson Heights, Queens

Atlantic, Smith and Court in Brooklyn

Other projects

Smart Parking Initiatives in New York

PARK Smart Program:

Progressive parking rate

Extended meter time limits

Value parking areas

Delivery windows

Paid commercial parking

Preliminary Results:

Occupancy declined 2% in

progressive rate area, from 80%

to 78%

Average duration declined by 20%

Smart Parking Companies

Streetline – parking location aggregator.

Parkwhiz – parking location aggregator, multiple cities

Spothero - parking location aggregator; currently in 12 cities

Bestparking.com - parking location aggregator including

airports

Parkingpanda.com – parking location aggregator, currently in

39 cities

Xerox – consultants for effectively managing parking and parking

related technologies

59

City ID—Chicago

• Chicago Downtown has 9,176 parking spaces which

earned a revenue of $29.7 million

• CO2 per peak commuter 434 pounds in 2011

• Chicago has the highest curbside meter rates in the

United States due to the city’s parking privatization

deal.

• The city has leased its 34,500 curbside parking

meters to Morgan Stanley for the next 75 years,

trading meter revenues for an upfront payment of

~$1.16 billion.

• 13 percent of Chicago’s traffic congestion occurs

when the weather is wet, snowy or icy

• Chicago-area roads lost more than $6 billion in

wasted time and fuel in 2011, according to the Texas

A&M Transportation Institute.

City ID

Metrics Data

Population 2,718,782 (2013)

Number of Cars 1,349,935 (2010)

Number of parking

spaces

36,000 metered parking spaces

(2013)

Revenue earned from

parking fines

Parking Tickets - $1,3 billion (2011)

Unpaid red-light camera fines -

$205 million

Unpaid speed camera fines -

$27 million

Parking meter revenue2014 - 130,508,353

2013 - 135,640,357

Total Parking tickets

issued2.4 million (2013)

Degree of motorization 591 cars per 1,000 people

Congestion time wastage161 hours/year (2012) (Texas

A&M)




Economic Impact

(Congestion)$8.2 billion (2010)

Economic Impact

(Parking)

$197/Vehicle/Year

$266 Million/Year

Key Insights

60

• ParkChicago, a pay-by-cell parking service, is appearing at 42,000 street parking signs and all 36,680 metered

parking spaces across the city.

• The city of Chicago has given control of the parking meters in the city to ‘Chicago Parking Meters LLC’ (CPM) on a

75 year lease for $1.15Bn

• CPM has a mobile payment app for parking called ParkChicago and collaborates with Passport Parking for

payments.

Revenue 2014 – $ 130.5 million

Revenue 2013 – $ 135.6 million

• SpotHero, Parkwhiz, ParkChicago are smart parking app that operates in Chicago

Other projects

Smart Parking Initiatives in Chicago

61

City ID—Washington D.C.

• Approximately 17,000 metered parking spaces, $40

Million in ticket sales

• 400,000 drivers are everyday looking for parking.

• 2012 – $92.6 Million in parking fines,1.8 Million

tickets, 2013 – $84.4M. Most of those tickets went to

drivers who live outside of D.C.

• About 71.3 percent of those parking tickets went to

drivers in Maryland and Virginia

City ID

Metrics Data

Population 6,971,406 (2013)

Number of Cars 286,715 (2013)

Number of parking

spaces

17,000 metered spaces around

Washington, D.C (2011)

Revenue earned from

parking fines 2013 – $84.4M; 2012 – $92.6 Million

Parking meter revenue $40 million (2013)

Total Parking tickets

issued1,803,587 (2013)

Parking cost

2.00/hour (premium demand

zones); $0.75/hour (normal demand

zones)

$19 a day to park or $270 a month

Degree of motorization 870 per 1000 people

Congestion time wastage 210 hours/year (2012)




Economic Impact

(Parking)

$258/Vehicle/Year

$74 Million/Year

Key Insights

62

• ParkedIn is an enterprise booking tool for parking management - on demand mobile application

• Washington DC’s Colonial Parking has today partnered with ParkMe to provide real-time occupancy information for

more than 100 of their parking facilities in DC in a move seen to make Washington, D.C. a world leader in off-street

smart parking.

Other projects

Smart Parking Initiatives in Washington D.C.

strategic assessment of the smart parking market€¦ · in-car, voice-activated parking spot...

Documents